Extensionality, axiom of Basic axiom of set theory. It asserts that sets are identical if and only if they have the same members.
| Philosophy Dictionary: axiom of extensionality |
Extensionality, axiom of Basic axiom of set theory. It asserts that sets are identical if and only if they have the same members.
| 5min Related Video: Axiom of extensionality |
| Wikipedia: Axiom of extensionality |
In axiomatic set theory and the branches of logic, mathematics, and computer science that use it, the axiom of extensionality, or axiom of extension, is one of the axioms of Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory.
Contents |
In the formal language of the Zermelo-Fraenkel axioms, the axiom reads:

or in words:
(It is not really essential that C here be a set — but in ZF, everything is. See Ur-elements below for when this is violated.)
The converse,
, of this axiom follows from the substitution property of equality.
To understand this axiom, note that the clause in parentheses in the symbolic statement above simply states that A and B have precisely the same members. Thus, what the axiom is really saying is that two sets are equal if and only if they have precisely the same members. The essence of this is:
The axiom of extensionality can be used with any statement of the form
, where P is any unary predicate that does not mention A or B, to define a unique set A whose members are precisely the sets satisfying the predicate P. We can then introduce a new symbol for A; it's in this way that definitions in ordinary mathematics ultimately work when their statements are reduced to purely set-theoretic terms.
The axiom of extensionality is generally uncontroversial in set-theoretical foundations of mathematics, and it or an equivalent appears in just about any alternative axiomatisation of set theory. However, it may require modifications for some purposes, as below.
The axiom given above assumes that equality is a primitive symbol in predicate logic. Some treatments of axiomatic set theory prefer to do without this, and instead treat the above statement not as an axiom but as a definition of equality. Then it is necessary to include the usual axioms of equality from predicate logic as axioms about this defined symbol. Most of the axioms of equality still follow from the definition; the remaining one is

and it becomes this axiom that is referred to as the axiom of extensionality in this context.
An ur-element is a member of a set that is not itself a set. In the Zermelo-Fraenkel axioms, there are no ur-elements, but some alternative axiomatisations of set theory have them. Ur-elements can be treated as a different logical type from sets; in this case,
makes no sense if A is an ur-element, so the axiom of extensionality simply applies only to sets.
Alternatively, in untyped logic, we can require
to be false whenever A is an ur-element. In this case, the usual axiom of extensionality would imply that every ur-element is equal to the empty set. To avoid this, we can modify the axiom of extensionality to apply only to nonempty sets, so that it reads:
![\forall A \, \forall B \, ( \exist C \, (C \in A) \Rightarrow [ \forall D \, (D \in A \iff D \in B) \Rightarrow A = B ] \, ).](http://wpcontent.answers.com/math/8/7/e/87e902e44a129798c50352247bc81f39.png)
That is:
Yet another alternative in untyped logic is to define A itself to be the only element of A whenever A is an ur-element. While this approach can serve to preserve the axiom of extensionality, the axiom of regularity will need an adjustment instead.
This entry is from Wikipedia, the leading user-contributed encyclopedia. It may not have been reviewed by professional editors (see full disclaimer)
| Best of the Web: Axiom of extensionality |
Some good "Axiom of extensionality" pages on the web:
Math mathworld.wolfram.com |
| Axiom of infinity | |
| Axiom of power set | |
| Code (set theory) |
| Can an axiom be proved? Read answer... | |
| Isuzu axiom oil leak? Read answer... | |
| Why your m-audio axiom is not playing? Read answer... |
| Do extensional fault lines become extensional earthquakes? | |
| What is the antonym of axiom? | |
| What are the equality axioms? |
Copyrights:
![]() | Philosophy Dictionary. The Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy. Copyright © 1994, 1996, 2005 by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. Read more | |
![]() | Wikipedia. This article is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License. It uses material from the Wikipedia article "Axiom of extensionality". Read more |